Newly observed phradseological units with noun forms of modal verbs

Newly observed phradseological units with noun forms of modal verbs
1.English from semantic and corpus perspectives. ?????? The discussion focuses on PUs shoulds and oughts, oughts and musts, and shoulds and musts. One of the interesting phenomena observed in contemporary English is the appearance of the noun forms of modal verbs. Examples include should, shoulds, oughts, and ought to’s, which resemble must. Adopting a quantitative perspective based on contemporary English corpora, I argue that not all modal verbs evolve into nouns and that past noun forms (e.g., could, should) and plural forms (e.g., shoulds, oughts) appear most frequently in contemporary English. I also demonstrate that plural forms (e.g., shoulds, oughts, and ought to’s) function as ‘‘obligations’’ because of their semantic analogy to must. This function reflects the essential functions of each modal verb. Regardless of whether they are singular or plural, the noun forms of modal verbs also serve meta-linguistic functions, as they raise awareness of the essential functions of each modal verb. Using examples from corpora, I demonstrate that PUs consisting of the noun forms of modal verbs such as shoulds and oughts, oughts and musts, and shoulds and musts are used more commonly than are the separate noun forms. Introduction Contemporary English changes rapidly. Studies by Mair and Leech (2006: 320) and by Leech and colleagues (2009) draw on data obtained from corpora1 to summarize English grammatical changes observed in contemporary English over recent decades. Studies on changes in contemporary English focus largely on the description of English lexical changes and grammaticalization. Little attention has been paid to the demonstration of actual behaviors involving newly produced phrases (generally defined as frequently used combinations consisting of at least two words). Although English dictionaries that have recently been published in Europe and the US attempt to describe and explain newly observed phrases, such descriptions and explanations are obviously far removed from the actual behavior of these phrases. Phraseology, the study of phrases, is based on the idea that phrases play essential roles in allowing language activity to proceed smoothly. When reading a newspaper, we easily find a large number of phrases consisting of words with which we are familiar. We feel as if we understand their meanings, even if they are not described in dictionaries. Nevertheless, we do not fully understand their meanings. Such phrases are ubiquitous in language, constituting a significant resource for communication. They can also help learners of English as a Foreign language, make their English as fluent as that of native speakers./ Most previous studies on phrases have not provided any comprehensive discussion of such phrases. When they are addressed, the discussion usually centers on a single phrase. For example, Biber et al. (1999) solely cite phrases called lexical bundles such as do you want me to, you want me, I think it’s a, and in the case of in the LSWE Corpus.2 Lexical bundles are referred to as lexical phrases in a dictionary and are 1 (a) A tendency to regularize irregular morphology (e.g., dreamed ? dreamt). (b) Revival of the ‘‘mandative’’ subjunctive, probably inspired by formal US usage (we demand that she take part in the meeting). (c) Elimination of shall as a future marker in the first person. (d) Development of new, auxiliary-like uses of certain lexical verbs (e.g., get, want—cf. e.g., the way you look, you wanna/want to see a doctor soon). (e) Extension of the progressive to new constructions, including the modal, present perfect, and past perfect passive progressive (the road would not be being built/has not been being built/had not been being built before the general elections). (f) Increase in the number and types of multi-word verbs (phrasal verbs, have/take/give a ride, etc.). (g) Placement of frequency adverbs before auxiliary verbs (even when no emphasis is intended—I never have said no). (h) Do-support for have (have you any money? and no, I haven’t any money ? do you have/have you got any money? and no, I don’t have any money/haven’t got any money). (i) Demise of the inflected form whom. (j) Increasing use of less instead of fewer with countable nouns (e.g., less people). (k) Spread of the s-genitive to non-human nouns (the book’s cover). (l) Omission of the definite article in certain environments (e.g., renowned Nobel laureate Derek Walcott). (m) ‘‘Singular’’ they (everybody came in their car). (n) Like, same as, and immediately used as conjunctions. (o) A tendency towards analytical comparatives and superlatives (politer ? more polite). 2 LSWE Corpus is the Longman Spoken and Written English Corpus. It contains over 40 million words of text, providing a sound basis for reliable analysis of grammatical patterns in different registers: We can easily predict the whole meaning of lexical phrases. However, there has been no systematic study of such phrases, which consist of familiar
. 2..Although native speakers of English are apparently good at finding and understanding. ?????? them, they have difficulty recognizing them, as their use in daily conversation is frequent, but unconscious. This study therefore focuses on phrases that have been overlooked to date and that have yet to be understood correctly. One interesting linguistic phenomenon in contemporary English involves the use of the noun forms of auxiliary verbs (e.g., oughts, shoulds). From a semantic perspective, the noun forms of auxiliary verbs are used in a meta-linguistic manner that reveals the core functions of each auxiliary verb. Some of the noun forms of auxiliary verbs are joined together to operate as phraseological units (e.g., shoulds and oughts and shoulds and musts). In the interest of advancing the present state of phraseology, this study describes the actual behaviors of newly observed phrases consisting of two noun forms of auxiliary verbs (e.g., shoulds and oughts, and shoulds and musts), drawing upon data obtained from corpora. The basic argument is that the meanings of phrases are closely related to their syntactic patterns. The study also demonstrates that newly observed phrases consisting of two noun forms of auxiliary verbs serve a unique grammatical function as nouns. In other words, the phrases formed by two function words behave like a content word. This reflects a trend opposite to that of grammaticalization: degrammaticalization. 2 Phraseology 2.1 What is phraseology? In general, phraseology is defined as ‘‘(A) choice of arrangement of words and phrases; style of expression; the particular form of which characterizes a language, author, work, etc.’’ (Shorter Oxford Dictionary, 6th edition; SOD6 ). Phraseology can also refer to unique forms of English (as compared to other languages). Examples include Hemingway’s phraseology (e.g., with regard to the characteristics of expressions and stylistics) and legal phraseology (i.e., words, terms, and phrases only used in legal discourse). As one of several fields of linguistic research, phraseology covers collocations,3 idioms,4 multi-word expressions,5 and formulae.6 Phraseological research deals 3 Collocations are defined as ‘‘word-combinations that have predictability and collocational range such as deciduous tree, rancid butter’’ (Inoue 2007: 105). 4 Many scholars define idioms from the viewpoint of semantic non-transparency or non-compositionality as whole meanings of idioms that cannot be derived from each component and that have strong semantic associations between components (e.g., kick the bucket and spill the beans). 5 Multi-word expressions are literally defined as phrases consisting of at least two words (e.g., you know what, here we go, here we go again). Unlike idioms, the whole meanings of multi-word expressions are Lexicography ASIALEX (2014) 1:137–157 139 123 with them from various perspectives. Burger et al. (2007) classify it into the following research areas at least. 1. (a) Subject area, terminology and research topics (b) Semantics of set phrases (c) Semiotic aspects of set phrases (d) Set phrases in discourse (e) Set phrases in types of texts and conversation (f) Phraseology of literary texts and individual authors (g) Proverbs (h) Particular types of set phrases (i) Set phrases in technical language (j) Areal aspects of phraseology (k) Contrastive phraseology and translation (l) Phraseology in individual languages (m) Cognitive and psycholinguistic aspects (n) Language acquisition and language teaching (o) Phraseolography (p). 3 Computational linguistic aspects of phraseology (??????) savol javobi bilan Corpus linguistic aspects of phraseology (r) Historical phraseology Also, Burger et al. (2007: XI) mentions that ‘‘… today there is a general consensus that phraseology encompasses a very palette of linguistic phenomena and issues’’. In practice, however, the coverage of phraseology is much wider, extending to include the syntactic patterns of the complementation of a verb, a predicative adjective, or noun. Originally, the combinations of two grammatical categories (e.g., a verb and a preposition) have been referred to as colligation in correspondence to collocation. The scope of phraseology has been expanded to include studies ranging from phrases to colligation. Examples include the types of complementation a verb (e.g., want) has or the semantic relationship between a verb (e.g., look) and a preposition. Phraseologies are thus linguistic research fields that address the actual behaviors of phrases as well as specific linguistic phenomena or irregularities adverbial particles in and on co-occur with various prepositions and help establish new CPs. For example, MED2 lists new CPs such as in at, in for, in on, on about, and on at. OALD8 describes in at, in for, and in with (s.v. in) and on about, on at, and on for (s.v. on). In addition, an extensive literature review shows that previous research and English dictionaries do not address this trend. The current situation regarding CPs does not fulfill the requirements for dictionaries. Inoue (2014) describes newly observed PUs created by combining two prepositions into a CP such as on against and in to and proposes that be on against and be in to are newly observed PUs in contemporary English, which have not yet been described in previous research or English dictionaries. Data obtained from corpora of present-day English show that on against and in to mainly co-occur with be verbs, and be on against and be in to are also observed. Same as new CPs, no dictionaries deal with PUs such as shoulds and oughts, oughts and musts, and shoulds and musts, which is the focal point of the study. Advanced English learners might understand their meanings because of the analogy to a must as a noun. However, they would not tell the difference between the three Pus.The fundamental thesis for this research is the theory of semantic syntax, which assumes that part of the meaning of a word is closely related to its syntactic characteristics. The reason why the study adopts the theory is that existing linguistic theories are valid only for native speakers of English. Researchers, whose native language is not English, have to use the inductive method which minutely describes and consistently explains linguistic phenomena in order that they interpret the intuition and expressions of native speakers of English. The theory can help the researchers to inquire into the use of English and is deeply rooted in the tradition of studying English in Japan. In addition, it is a continuation of the tradition revised and developed under the influence of various linguistic theories developed in the United States and elsewhere. 3.2 Data This study is based on data obtained from the British National Corpus, WordBanksOnline, and the Corpus of Contemporary American English. As demonstrated by Sampson (2001), the use of a corpus as a database offers three advantages. First, a corpus can be established by collecting and recording both spoken and written language. Therefore, it allows the objectification of data on which research is based. It also facilitates access to spontaneously used data for language research. A second advantage of corpora is that they allow for the verification of research results on demand by third parties. In contrast, data based on human intuition are not objective, as they are accessible only to the researcher, thus preventing their validation by third parties. Research and theories that allow third-party verification are open to the possibility of refutation, which increases their credibility To date, scholars have paid considerable attention to the classification of modality.7 This study proceeds from the most widespread and influential classifications in use since the late 1960s: epistemic modality and root modality.8 Epistemic modality concerns an estimation of the likelihood that a certain state of affairs (or some aspect thereof) is/has been/will be true (or false) in the context of the possible world under consideration. Root modality is concerned with applying attitudes to the world of things and social interaction. The following table shows the functions of each auxiliary verb listed in Table 1 when classified according to epistemic modalities and root modalities (based on Aarts 2001: 282ff.; Jenkins 1972: 72f). 5 Results 5.1 Quantitative and qualitative research Table 2 provides the noun forms of auxiliary verbs listed in Table 1. I investigated the frequency of each noun form using three corpora: the British National Corpus Table 1 Auxiliary verbs a I adopt the term used in Aarts (2011) b I adopt the term used in Aarts (2011) Root/present form Past form Types Can Could Core modal auxiliary (core modal verbs)a May Might Shall Should Will Would Must n/a Ought to n/a Marginal modalsb Used to n/a Need n/a Dare n/a 7 von Wright (1951) classifies modality into five types from a logical viewpoint: alethic, epistemic, deontic, existential, and dynamic. Hofmann (1976) divides modality into root and epistemic. Halliday (1970) refers to modulation and modality, while Ota (1972) refers to cognitive and epistemic. Close (1975) classifies modality into primary and secondary; and Quirk and colleagues (1985) classify it into intrinsic and extrinsic, and Palmer (2001) classifies it into root and epistemic. 8 This classification has been adopted by Hofmann (1966), Perlmutter (1970), Jackendoff (1972), Ota (1972), Jenkins (1972), Coates (1983), Davidsen-Neilsen (1990), Sweetser (1990), Declerck (1991), Langacker (1991), Brennan (1993), Sawada (1975,1993, 1995) and Westney (1995). Lexicography ASIALEX (2014) 1:137–157 145 123 (BNC), WordBanksOnline (WB), and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).9 The results are presented in must, and have to are summarized in (14) 14. (a) Should, must subjective obligation/compulsion, which a speaker considers obligatory (b) Ought to, ought, have to objective
TARJIMA UZBEK
Modal fe'llarning ot shakllari bilan yangi kuzatilgan frazeologik birliklar
Xulosa Ushbu tadqiqot zamonaviy ingliz tilida yangi kuzatilgan frazeologik birliklarga (PU) semantik va korpus nuqtai nazaridan yondashadi. Muhokama asosiy e'tibor PU lar kerak va kerak, kerak va kerak, va kerak va kerak. Zamonaviy ingliz tilida kuzatilgan qiziqarli hodisalardan biri modal fe'llarning ot shakllarining paydo bo'lishidir. Bunga must-ga o'xshash should, shoulds, oughts va ought to's kiradi. Zamonaviy ingliz korpusiga asoslangan miqdoriy nuqtai nazarni qabul qilgan holda, men barcha modal fe'llar otlarga aylanmaydi va o'tmishdagi ot shakllari (masalan, mumkin, kerak) va ko'plik shakllari (masalan, shoulds, oughts) zamonaviy ingliz tilida ko'pincha paydo bo'lishini ta'kidlayman. . Bundan tashqari, ko‘plik shakllari (masalan, shoulds, oughts va ought to's) must ga semantik o‘xshashligi tufayli “majburiyatlar” vazifasini bajarishini ko‘rsataman. Bu funktsiya har bir modal fe'lning muhim vazifalarini aks ettiradi. Birlik yoki ko‘plik bo‘lishidan qat’i nazar, modal fe’llarning ot shakllari ham metalingvistik vazifalarni bajaradi, chunki ular har bir modal fe’lning muhim vazifalari haqida tushunchani oshiradi. Korporadan misollar yordamida men modal fe'llarning ot shakllaridan tashkil topgan PU lar alohida ot shakllariga qaraganda ko'proq qo'llanilishini ko'rsataman: shoulds and oughts, oughts va musts, shoulds and musts. Kirish Zamonaviy ingliz tili tez o'zgaradi. Mair va Leech (2006: 320) va Leech va uning hamkasblari (2009) tomonidan olib borilgan tadqiqotlar so'nggi o'n yilliklarda zamonaviy ingliz tilida kuzatilgan ingliz grammatik o'zgarishlarini umumlashtirish uchun korpora1 dan olingan ma'lumotlarga asoslanadi. Zamonaviy ingliz tilidagi o'zgarishlar bo'yicha tadqiqotlar asosan ingliz tilidagi leksik o'zgarishlar va grammatikizatsiyani tavsiflashga qaratilgan. Yangi ishlab chiqarilgan iboralar (odatda kamida ikkita so'zdan iborat tez-tez ishlatiladigan birikmalar sifatida aniqlanadi) bilan bog'liq haqiqiy xatti-harakatlarning namoyishiga kam e'tibor qaratildi. Garchi Yevropa va AQShda yaqinda nashr etilgan inglizcha lug'atlar yangi kuzatilgan iboralarni tasvirlash va tushuntirishga harakat qilsa-da, bunday tavsif va tushuntirishlar ushbu iboralarning haqiqiy xatti-harakatlaridan ancha uzoqdir. Frazeologiya, so‘z birikmalarini o‘rganuvchi fan so‘z birikmalarining til faoliyatining bir maromda davom etishida muhim rol o‘ynashi haqidagi fikrga asoslanadi. Gazetani o'qiyotganda, biz osongina tanish bo'lgan so'zlardan iborat ko'p sonli iboralarni topamiz. Biz ularning ma’nolarini lug‘atlarda tasvirlanmagan bo‘lsa ham, tushungandek his qilamiz. Shunga qaramay, biz ularning ma'nolarini to'liq tushunmayapmiz. Bunday iboralar tilda hamma joyda mavjud bo'lib, aloqa uchun muhim manba hisoblanadi. Shuningdek, ular ingliz tilini chet tili sifatida o'rganuvchilarga yordam berishlari, ingliz tilini ona tilida so'zlashuvchilar kabi ravon qilishlari mumkin. So'z birikmalari bo'yicha oldingi tadqiqotlarning aksariyati bunday iboralarni har tomonlama muhokama qilmagan. Ularga murojaat qilinganda, muhokama odatda bitta iboraga qaratiladi. Masalan, Biber va boshqalar. (1999) faqat do you want me to, you want me, my think it's a, in the case in the LSWE Corpus.2 Leksik to‘plamlar lug‘atda leksik iboralar deb ataladi va ular 1 (a) tartibsiz morfologiyani tartibga solish tendentsiyasi (masalan, tush ko'rgan ? tush ko'rgan). (b) ''mandativ'' subjunktivining jonlanishi, ehtimol AQShning rasmiy qo'llanilishidan ilhomlangan (biz uni yig'ilishda ishtirok etishini talab qilamiz). (c) will ning birinchi shaxsda kelajak belgisi sifatida olib tashlanishi. (d) Ayrim leksik fe'llarning yangi, yordamchi o'xshash qo'llanishlarini ishlab chiqish (masalan, ol, istayman, masalan, ko'rinishing, tez orada shifokorni ko'rishni xohlaysan). (e) progressivning yangi konstruktsiyalarga, jumladan modal, hozirgi mukammal va o'tmish mukammal passiv progressivga kengayishi (umumiy saylovlargacha yo'l qurilmagan / qurilmagan / qurilmagan edi). (f) koʻp soʻzli feʼllarning soni va turlarining koʻpayishi (frazema, ega/al/mavuz va hokazo). (g) chastota qo‘shimchalarini yordamchi fe’llar oldiga qo‘yish (hatto hech qanday urg‘u nazarda tutilmagan bo‘lsa ham — men hech qachon yo‘q demaganman). (h) Do-support (sizda pul bormi? va yo'q, menda pul yo'q? sizda pul bormi/sizda bormi? va yo'q, menda pul yo'q/yo'q) pul). (i) whom tuslovchi shaklining yo‘qolishi. (j) sanoqli otlar bilan kamroq o‘rniga kamroq qo‘llanishi (masalan, kam odam). (k) s-genitivning odam bo‘lmagan otlarga tarqalishi (kitob muqovasi). (l) Muayyan muhitlarda aniq artiklni olib tashlash (masalan, taniqli Nobel mukofoti laureati Derek Uolkott). (m) ‘‘ Singular’’ ular (hamma o‘z mashinasida keldi). (n) kabi, xuddi shunday va darhol bog‘lovchi sifatida ishlatiladi. (o) Analitik qiyosiy va ustunliklarga moyillik (politer ? ko'proq muloyim). 2 LSWE Corpus - bu Longmanning og'zaki va yozma ingliz korpusi. U turli registrlardagi grammatik naqshlarni ishonchli tahlil qilish uchun asosli asos bo'lgan 40 milliondan ortiq matnni o'z ichiga oladi: Biz leksik iboralarning butun ma'nosini osongina taxmin qilishimiz mumkin. Biroq tanish so‘zlardan tashkil topgan va tushunish qiyin bo‘lgan bunday iboralarni tizimli o‘rganilmagan. Ingliz tilida so'zlashuvchilar ularni topish va tushunishda yaxshi bo'lsa-da, ularni tanib olishda qiynaladilar, chunki kundalik suhbatda ulardan foydalanish tez-tez, lekin ongsiz. Shuning uchun ushbu tadqiqotda e'tibordan chetda qolgan va hali to'g'ri tushunilmagan iboralarga e'tibor qaratilgan. Zamonaviy ingliz tilidagi qiziqarli lingvistik hodisa yordamchi fe'llarning ot shakllaridan foydalanishni o'z ichiga oladi (masalan, oughts, shoulds). Semantik nuqtai nazardan, yordamchi fe'llarning ot shakllari har bir yordamchi fe'lning asosiy funktsiyalarini ochib beradigan metalingvistik usulda qo'llaniladi. Ko‘makchi fe’llarning ba’zi ot shakllari bir-biriga qo‘shilib, frazeologik birlik vazifasini bajaradi (masalan, kerak va kerak, kerak va kerak). Frazeologiyaning hozirgi holatini yaxshilash maqsadida, ushbu tadqiqot yordamchi fe'llarning ikkita ot shaklidan (masalan, kerak va kerak va kerak va kerak) iborat yangi kuzatilgan iboralarning haqiqiy xatti-harakatlarini korpusdan olingan ma'lumotlarga asoslanib tasvirlaydi. Asosiy dalil so‘z birikmalarining ma’nolari ularning sintaktik qoliplari bilan chambarchas bog‘liqdir. Tadqiqot shuningdek, yordamchi fe’llarning ikki ot shaklidan tashkil topgan yangi kuzatilgan iboralar ot sifatida o‘ziga xos grammatik vazifani bajarishini ko‘rsatadi. Boshqacha aytganda, ikki vazifali so‘z bilan tuzilgan iboralar mazmunli so‘z kabi harakat qiladi. Bu grammatiklashtirishga qarama-qarshi tendentsiyani aks ettiradi: degrammatikizatsiya. 2 Frazeologiya 2.1 Frazeologiya nima? Umuman olganda, frazeologiyaga ‘‘(A) so‘z va iboralar joylashuvini tanlash; ifoda uslubi; tilni, muallifni, asarni va boshqalarni tavsiflovchi o'ziga xos shakl.'' (Qisqaroq Oksford lug'ati, 6-nashr; SOD6). Frazeologiya ingliz tilining o'ziga xos shakllariga ham murojaat qilishi mumkin (boshqa tillarga nisbatan). Masalan, Xemingueyning frazeologiyasi (masalan, iboralar va stilistika xususiyatlariga nisbatan) va huquqiy frazeologiya (ya'ni, faqat yuridik nutqda ishlatiladigan so'zlar, atamalar va iboralar). Frazeologiya tilshunoslikning bir qancha sohalaridan biri sifatida birikmalar, 3 idioma, 4 koʻp soʻzli iboralar, 5 va formulalarni qamrab oladi.6 Frazeologik tadqiqotlar 3. Qoʻshma gaplar “bargli daraxt kabi oldindan aytish mumkin boʻlgan va birikma diapazoniga ega boʻlgan soʻz birikmalari” deb taʼriflanadi. , achchiq sariyog '' (Inoue 2007: 105). 4 Koʻpgina olimlar iboralarni semantik shaffoflik yoki kompozitsiyasizlik nuqtai nazaridan har bir komponentdan kelib chiqib boʻlmaydigan va komponentlar oʻrtasida kuchli semantik bogʻlanishga ega boʻlgan iboralarning yaxlit maʼnolari deb taʼriflaydilar (masalan, chelakni tepib, loviyani toʻkib tashlash). 5 Ko‘p so‘zli iboralar so‘zma-so‘z ma’noda kamida ikki so‘zdan tashkil topgan iboralar sifatida aniqlanadi (masalan, bilasizmi, mana, mana, yana boramiz). Idiomalardan farqli o'laroq, ko'p so'zli iboralarning butun ma'nolari Lexicography ASIALEX (2014) 1:137–157 139 123 ular bilan turli nuqtai nazardan. Burger va boshqalar. (2007) uni hech bo'lmaganda quyidagi tadqiqot yo'nalishlariga tasniflang. 1. (a) predmet sohasi, atamashunoslik va tadqiqot mavzulari (b) to‘plam iboralarning semantikasi (c) to‘plam iboralarning semiotik jihatlari (d) nutqdagi to‘plam iboralari (e) matn va suhbat turlarida o‘rnatilgan iboralar (f) frazeologiya. adabiy matnlar va alohida mualliflar (g) Hikmatlar (h) to‘plamning alohida turlari (i) Texnika matnidagi o‘rnatilgan iboralar. til (j) Frazeologiyaning hududiy jihatlari (k) Kontrastiv frazeologiya va tarjima (l) Ayrim tillardagi frazeologiya (m) Kognitiv va psixolingvistik jihatlar (n) Tilni o‘zlashtirish va til o‘rgatish (o) Frazeologiya (p) Frazeologiyaning hisoblash lingvistik jihatlari ( q) Frazeologiyaning korpus lingvistik jihatlari (r) Tarixiy frazeologiya Shuningdek, Burger va b. (2007: XI) "... bugungi kunda frazeologiya til hodisalari va muammolarining juda ko'p palitrasini o'z ichiga oladi degan umumiy kelishuv mavjud" deb ta'kidlaydi. Amalda esa frazeologizmlarning qamrovi ancha keng bo‘lib, fe’l, predikativ sifat yoki otni to‘ldiruvchining sintaktik qoliplarini qamrab oladi. Dastlab, ikkita grammatik kategoriyaning birikmalari (masalan, fe'l va bosh gap) birikmaga mos kelishi bilan bog'liqlik deb atalgan. Frazeologizmlar doirasi kengayib, iboralardan tortib kolligatsiyaga qadar bo‘lgan tadqiqotlarni ham qamrab oldi. Masalan, fe’lning to‘ldiruvchi turlari (masalan, istayman) yoki fe’l (masalan, qarash) va bosh gap o‘rtasidagi semantik munosabat kiradi. Shunday qilib, frazeologizmlar iboralarning haqiqiy xatti-harakatlarini, shuningdek, ma'lum bir lingvistik hodisa yoki nosimmetrikliklar bilan bog'liq bo'lgan qo'shimcha zarralarning turli xil yuklamalar bilan birgalikda uchraydigan va yangi CPlarni yaratishga yordam beradigan lingvistik tadqiqot sohalaridir. Masalan, MED2 in at, in for, in on, on about va on at kabi yangi CPlarni sanab o'tadi. OALD8 at, in for, in with (s.v. in) va on about, on at va on for (s.v. on) da tasvirlaydi. Bundan tashqari, keng qamrovli adabiyotlarni o'rganish shuni ko'rsatadiki, avvalgi tadqiqotlar va ingliz tilidagi lug'atlar bu tendentsiyaga to'g'ri kelmaydi. . CP bilan bog'liq mavjud vaziyat lug'atlarga qo'yiladigan talablarga javob bermaydi. Inoue (2014) ikkita predlogni CP ga birlashtirish orqali yaratilgan yangi kuzatilgan PU larni tasvirlaydi, masalan, qarshi va in to kabi va qarshi va in to bo'lgan zamonaviy ingliz tilidagi yangi kuzatilgan PUlarni taklif qiladi, ular hali oldingi tadqiqotlarda tasvirlanmagan. yoki inglizcha lug'atlar. Hozirgi ingliz tili korpusidan olingan maʼlumotlar shuni koʻrsatadiki, on qarshi va to asosan be feʼllari bilan birga keladi, be on qarshi va be in to ham kuzatiladi. Xuddi yangi CPlar singari, hech qanday lug'atlarda o'rganishning asosiy nuqtasi bo'lgan kerak va kerak, kerak va kerak, kerak va kerak kabi PUlar haqida gap ketmaydi. Ilg'or ingliz tilini o'rganuvchilar ularning ma'nolarini ot sifatida majburiy o'xshashlik tufayli tushunishlari mumkin. Biroq, ular uchta Pus o'rtasidagi farqni aytolmaydilar. Ushbu tadqiqotning asosiy tezisi semantik sintaksis nazariyasi bo'lib, so'z ma'nosining bir qismi uning sintaktik xususiyatlari bilan chambarchas bog'liqligini taxmin qiladi. Tadqiqot nazariyani qabul qilishining sababi shundaki, mavjud lingvistik nazariyalar faqat ingliz tilida so'zlashuvchilar uchun amal qiladi. Ona tili ingliz tili bo'lmagan tadqiqotchilar ingliz tilida so'zlashuvchilarning sezgi va ifodalarini sharhlash uchun lingvistik hodisalarni batafsil tavsiflovchi va izchil tushuntiradigan induktiv usuldan foydalanishlari kerak. Nazariya tadqiqotchilarga ingliz tilidan foydalanishni o'rganishda yordam berishi mumkin va Yaponiyada ingliz tilini o'rganish an'analarida chuqur ildiz otgan. Bundan tashqari, bu AQSh va boshqa mamlakatlarda ishlab chiqilgan turli lingvistik nazariyalar ta'sirida qayta ko'rib chiqilgan va ishlab chiqilgan an'ananing davomidir. 3.2 Ma'lumotlar Ushbu tadqiqot Britaniya Milliy Korpusi, WordBanksOnline va Zamonaviy Amerika ingliz tili korpusidan olingan ma'lumotlarga asoslangan. Sampson tomonidan ko'rsatilgandek, (2001), korpusdan ma'lumotlar bazasi sifatida foydalanish uchta afzallik beradi. Birinchidan, og'zaki va yozma tillarni yig'ish va yozib olish yo'li bilan korpus tashkil etilishi mumkin. Shuning uchun u tadqiqotga asoslangan ma'lumotlarni ob'ektivlashtirishga imkon beradi. Shuningdek, u tilni o'rganish uchun o'z-o'zidan foydalaniladigan ma'lumotlarga kirishni osonlashtiradi. Korporatsiyaning ikkinchi afzalligi shundaki, ular tadqiqot natijalarini uchinchi shaxslar talabiga binoan tekshirish imkonini beradi. Bundan farqli o'laroq, inson sezgisiga asoslangan ma'lumotlar ob'ektiv emas, chunki ular faqat tadqiqotchi uchun ochiq bo'lib, uchinchi shaxslar tomonidan tasdiqlanishiga to'sqinlik qiladi. Uchinchi tomon tomonidan tekshirishga imkon beruvchi tadqiqot va nazariyalar rad etish imkoniyatiga ochiq bo‘lib, bu ularning ishonchliligini oshiradi. Bugungi kunga qadar olimlar modallik tasnifiga katta e’tibor qaratishgan. 1960-yillarning oxiri: epistemik modallik va ildiz modalligi.8 Epistemik modallik ma'lum bir holatning (yoki uning ba'zi bir tomonining) mumkin bo'lgan dunyo kontekstida haqiqat bo'lishi/bo'lishi/bo'lish ehtimolini baholashga tegishli. hisobga olish. Ildiz modalligi narsalar dunyosiga va ijtimoiy o'zaro munosabatlarga munosabatni qo'llash bilan bog'liq. Quyidagi jadvalda 1-jadvalda keltirilgan har bir yordamchi fe'lning epistemik uslublar va ildiz modalliklariga ko'ra tasniflangan vazifalari ko'rsatilgan (Aarts 2001: 282ff.; Jenkins 1972: 72f). 5 Natijalar 5.1 Miqdoriy va sifat tadqiqoti 2-jadvalda 1-jadvalda keltirilgan yordamchi fe’llarning ot shakllari keltirilgan. Men har bir ot shaklining chastotasini uchta korpusdan foydalangan holda tekshirdim: Britaniya Milliy korpusi 1-jadval Yordamchi fe’llar a Men Aartda qo‘llanilgan atamani qabul qilaman. Aarts (2011) b Men Aarts (2011) Ildiz/hozirgi shaklda ishlatiladigan atamani qabul qilaman. Used to n/a Need n/a Dare n/a 7 von Rayt (1951) modallikni mantiqiy nuqtai nazardan besh turga ajratadi: aletik, epistemik, deontik, ekzistensial va dinamik. Hofman (1976) modallikni ildiz va epistemikga ajratadi. Halliday (1970) modulyatsiya va modallikka ishora qiladi, Ota (1972) esa kognitiv va epistemik. Close (1975) modallikni birlamchi va ikkilamchi turlarga ajratadi; va Quirk va uning hamkasblari (1985) uni ichki va tashqi, Palmer (2001) esa ildiz va epistemik deb tasniflaydi. 8 Ushbu tasnif Hofmann (1966), Perlmutter (1970), Jekendoff (1972), Ota (1972), Jenkins (1972), Coates (1983), Davidsen-Neilsen (1990), Sweetser (1990), Deklerk tomonidan qabul qilingan. (1991), Langacker (1991), Brennan (1993), Sawada (1975,1993, 1995) va Westney (1995). Lexicography ASIALEX (2014) 1:137–157 145 123 (BNC), WordBanksOnline (WB) va The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).9 Natijalar shart shaklida taqdim etilgan va (14) 14 da umumlashtirilgan boʻlishi kerak. (a) Ma'ruzachi majburiy deb hisoblagan sub'ektiv majburiyat/majburiyat (b) kerak, kerak, ob'ektiv bo'lishi kerak.
DICTIONARIES---LUG’ATLATR
1.Halliday halliday
2.core yadro
3.modal modal
4.need kerak
5.dare jur’at et 6.untis—untis
7.contemporary--- zamondosh
8.semantic--- semantik
9.corpus-- korpus
10.shoulds-- kerak
11.interesting- -qiziqarli
12.phrnomena-- phonoma
13.observed-- kuzatilgan
14.appearance— ko’rinish
15.forms--- shakli
16.modal---- modal
17.include— o’ichiga oladi
18.ougts- -chiqaradi
19.which--- qaysi
20.resemble--- o’xshash
21.must--- kerak
22.quantitative-- miqdoriy
23.perspective— nuqtai nazar
24.based- -asoslangan
25.argue-- bahslashmoq
26.modal- -modal
27.verbs— fe’llar
28.demonstr ----demonstr
29.appear paydo bulgan
30.most eng
31.analogy analogiya
32.function funktsiyasi
33.demonstr demonistr
34.awrenes awrenes
35.sinuglar singlar
36.commonly odatda
37.forms shakllari
38.such shunday
39.changz changz
40.rapidy tez

41ideya g’oya

42.frequently tez-tez
43.largen kattaroq
44.shoulds kerak
45.oughts kerak
46.ought kerak
47.function funktasiya
48.obligation majburiy
49.because chunki
50.semantic semantik
53.analogy analogiya
54.reflects aks ettiradi
55.musts shart
56.are bor
57.used ishlatilgan
58.decades o’n yilliklar
59.studies o’rganish
60.changes o’zgarishlar
61.contemporary zamondoshlar
62.Although garchi
63.have bor
64.recenty yaqinda
65.been published nashir etish
66.attempt urinish
67.describen tasvirlab bermoq
68.explain tushintirish
69.newly yangi
70.observed kuzatilgan
71.desriptinos tavsifi
72.nevertheles shunga qaramay
73.fully to’liq
74.undersantd tushionarli
75.example misol
76.cite keltirmoq
77.passive passiv
78.road yo’l
79. would bo’ladi
80.money pul
81.usage foydalanish
82.demand talab
83.dic dic

84 language til

85 areal hududiy
86 aspect jihati
87 contrastive kontrastli
88 translation tarjima
89 individual individuval
90 cognitive kognitiv
91 acquisition sotib olish
92 teaching ta’lim berish
93 compultational hisoblash
94 linguistic lingvistik
95 aspects jihatlari
96 corpus korpus
97 mentions eslab o’tadi
98 conversation suhbat
99 demonstrated namoyish qilingan
100 characteristics xususiyatlari